Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
independent state. israel has the right to live in peace and security with its neighbors. there is no substitute for negotiations. today's vote underscores the urgency of meaningful negotiations. we must give a do impetus to ensure an independent democratic state of palestine lives with a secure state of israel. i urge the parties to renew their commitment for negotiating peace. i count on all to act responsibly, preserve your treatment in state building under the leadership of president abbas and the prime minister. thank you. [applause] >> i think the secretary-general of the united nations for a statement. >> we will break away from the united nations where they have approved palestine f nineor nonmember status by a vote of 138 in favor. 41 countries abstained. i will take you now back to capitol hill. former congressional leaders and vice president joe biden will pay tribute to former new hampshire senator. he died november 19 at the age of 82. he was a key player in the budget negotiation for the 1980's and the ranking republican during the iran- contra hearings. dav
and what i think about that. >> yes. >> any time israel is involved in a story, did becomes excruciatingly -- id becomes excruciatingly difficult to cover, because there is a sense of identity in this country with israelis, and many reporters, old friends and colleagues of mine used to be criticized for taking an anti- israeli point of view. he spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic. of view to arabs. i think what is happening in gaza right now meets in the definition of tragedy. the israelis cannot be expected to stand by while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the idea that the israeli defense forces are equally professional, the number of casualties on the palestinian side are going to be much greater. they are leaving an impression there is something unfair. this is the time you need correspondents who have spent years in the region, because by and large, you ask what i think of the coverage. i think it is surface. it focuses on the casualties. you do not know what the possibilities may be for agreement on the sides. i think that is one thing we hav
development in israel and gaza. tomorrow we will discuss party in the united states. after that, the executive director for the national congress of american indians explains with the fiscal cliff and native americans and the alaskan native communities. plus, e-mails, phone calls, and tweets. >> there are many people who might even take issue with great saving the union during the civil war. did it lincoln did that? he did. i will not a grant is the only person to save the union, but he was the commanding general of the army that would think the policy to affect, and he was the general who accepted the surrender of the army of northern virginia under robert e. lee that ended the war. if anybody won the war on the battlefield, if you could say that any one person did, and of course you cannot, but one of the things we do when history is we generalize, simplify, because history reality is simply too complicated to get our heads are around if we deal with it in the full complexity. granted save the union during the civil war, and i do contend he same award during reconstruction as well. -- he sav
before the united states as opposed to israel or neighbors of iran? i think it is possible that we could accept something that the iranians would say we have already picked the japan option. we want to demonstrate we have the technical capabilities, but without the possibility of deploying full weapons systems and we would give assurance to the international community. whether the president used slightly more casual language than he intended that day, i do not know. as for timons, remember -- -- time lines, remember, there are a range of tools being used to interrupt, if you will come in iran -- if you will, to iran as fast track to nuclear capability. its sounds implausible, but we really do not know. the deadline keeps shifting, literally keeps shifting, because the iranians are suffering setbacks within their own time line and that is not always apparent to us. i am not saying it has to be done by a particular year or not. there will always be an external variables that slightly change the dynamics of this. >> ellen, can i add on that? i think the reason 2013, early 2014 is the focus
be built. i spoke earlier today with the consulate general for the state of israel in philadelphia offering my support and concern for the unfortunate circumstances that are taking place in the middle east now in which hundreds of bombs have -- rockets have been shot at israel. some of its largest cities as the targets. and this is a matter in which obviously much high levels in our government, there have been communications and the assurance that israel has the right to defend itself. but i think that we can see in this russia trade agreement that if we can get to the point where there can be relationships that are built on self-interest and economic development, that we can put the weapons aside and move towards a circumstance in which people are focused on economic activity. we see in this crisis a circumstance that we hope will resolve itself. obviously we stand with our ally, but we also hope for a day in which peace will reign and economic opportunities. i agree with david dreier, really is a way in which eventually we can create a circumstance in which people will not have the necess
of their force projection in the persian gulf into that conflict. i think there is hope that the u.s.-israel relationship is strong and open enough and the lines of communication are open up that it would not happen. one of the other things that if it may give a little positivity towards that is a concern that the nuclear facilities are so far in the ground that israel does not producing a satisfactory assault. they would need u.s. plant emissions to carry some of those weapons. perhaps that might give some hope there would be communication, if there is an attack down the line, that the two countries would be to work together and cordray. host: 3 more, go to foreignpolicy.com. thank you for talking to our viewers. guest: thank you for having me. host: that does it for today. we will be back live tomorrow morning but lawmakers make their way back for the lame-duck session that begins today. we will be up there taking your calls and your comments and questions. thank you for watching today. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite cor
think that's across the board , his relationship with israel, his relationship with the muslim world. host: this is a "financial times" editorial today. rethink on drones after petraeus exit. general petraeus has been the master mind behind using deprones to go after al qaeda in the horn of africa, etc. what has been the world reaction to these -- this type of mill tear strategy. guest: the administration has doubled down on thes you of drones. there are hundreds more than there ever were in the bush administration. there's clear security rationale for some of them. there are certainly issues. the administration's execity -- executive privilege in making these decisions. i don't think petraeus was the only person who has been the master mind. this has been -- there are many figures in the administration that feel strongly about this. i don't see the policy changing. but there is certainly a feeling in pakistan, especially, in the horn of africa and other places new york yemen, it was -- i believe it was the day of -- the day after, the morning after the evening of obama's victory, th
capabilities to go up to 20%. israel and u.s. will build the case for military action, low level violence will continue against iran in various forms. and identify ran -- iran, can prepare an attack on the reactors considering potential success of the operation against the facility in syria. and this will all remove iran's constraints to acquire nuclear weapons. so we are either -- really concerned with the situation. let me add people of iran will continue to suffer under very tough sanctions. so there are two things which must change. diplomacy and the inspections. first diplomacy. five plus one has served the purpose of the it united front. five plus one mean to me united nations security council related global responsibility, europeans like to prefer three plus three which means the european union is the major player. i'm nervous about that, if you are europe you had better say three plus three otherwise you will not be served your dinner. five plus one, of course, it is important to keep on. i think u.s. should not do what it has done, hide inside this group. u.s. has now tried to ta
. >> are you concerned about is real? >> interesting, israel has a lot at stake, but they are also an independent decision maker. they have their own interest in this and have made it clear that they are not prepared to except without some of the military action iran with a clear path to a nuclear weapon. one scenario would be for the illustration to try to engage with the iranians diplomatically. with the other countries involved in the so called p five. offering a robust disclosure to the iranians if there regime will give up its nuclear program. to test them, to see if there is a diplomatic outcome that is accessible. if there is not, i think that that process will be important for the administration to set up options following the failure,, or the iranian regime. i would be very much on the lower end of military options. as part of the scenario of giving them over to give up weapons, it is that kind of scenario development i would try, which is the direction we're heading in at this point. dennis is going to speak to you later this morning, he is terrific on this subject and yo
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9